This looks to be equally represented but perhaps the me too-ers are blind to anything other than the men envisioned in their brains:
‘PC stuff is getting ridiculous’: Radio stations axe Christmas classic due to #MeToo concerns [rt.com]
In the 50s, when this song was released, women sometimes said no because they were afraid of appearing easy, or like the "naughty girl."
It's clear that's the case in this song. There's playful flirtation on both sides.
This good girl image is not a concern to the same degree now, or at all. So, when a women says no, she likely means it.
I don't believe these two time periods should be conflated.
@Ms_McSteven but why work at banning the song from the radio? What is the logic of a restraining order if after a situation like the two scenarios shown above neither protaganist makes further approach?
It is like the absurdity frequently offered in court by women -
Woman demanding restraining order off magistrate - "he looked at me like he wanted to fuck me there and then!"
"Yes madam. Which part of his mind did you also read to ascertain his desire or was it yours that you projected on to him?" asked the magistrate.
I see no problem with the song and appreciate that was part of the game back then, whether it meets today's standards of asserting oneself or not.
A see old movies where teenagers aren't wearing seatbelts, hanging out of car windows and putting themselves at risk. We would never send a message that's okay, now, but I don't want to ban all movies with beltless scenes in them.
If a man makes it clear to me that he wants to have sex with me, I've clearly said no and he persists, that would really be a problem based on how we've evolved.
That's true for women too. We also needed to learn how to communicate clearly in all situations. If women are truly liberated, it is a woman's prerogative to playfully say no whenever she wants, even now. If she senses she's in danger, that's a whole different scenario. This song is clearly not that.
@Ms_McSteven Having just watched the video there are two versions one featuring a man and one a woman. Is this what is described as not being able to see the elephant in the room?
@Athena Sixty years ago we were not taught how to communicate. I wonder if children are today?
Thank you for your rational response.
@Ms_McSteven Does that prove that women are greater teases and free loaders out for meals, drinks, night clubs and theatres?
@Ms_McSteven Please tell me where in this sub thread I talk about inviting people to dinner?
Is someone messing with what you are reading in this sub thread? Where do you read that I suggest that "You get to rape her for eating." And
"You claimed there are times when grown men might "need" to have sex with a child," ?
The latter being particularly ridiculous as I think I am probably the only person on this site who advocates that you do not need another person, limbs, erection, sex toys, clitoral stimulation or hands to achieve satisfactory orgasm.
Oh for fuck sake!!! This is ridiculous!
Isn't it just. And they think that they are correct. Shake of head.
But rap songs that openly advocate spousal abuse, rape and disrespect are cultural art?
Saucey humour and double entdre are an important part of western culture, this is a comedy song and jokes by definition have to have a but(t?) of the joke, being able to take a joke is part of our western culture too.
Anyone can do this with any song, so what? A part of the magic of art, lyrics, prose and poetry is the battle between the writer and the reader, the various interpretations, the cultural perceptions, the context.
Jacque Derrida made a career out of discussing this very idea.
Limiting art and thought, censoring possibilities is the gateway to oppression.
I think the me too movement is very important. That being said, you can look at this song in 2 ways. 1, the not taking no for an answer rapey way it sounds on the surface. I'm sure many of us have experienced a guy we clearly state we are not interested in be annoyingly persistent. The problem is we don't know if that annoying persistence will turn violent. Or 2, listen to it with the thought in mind that when this song was written, women weren't allowed to be sexually free. This song is her way of it being ok for her to eventually stay because "good" girls don't say yes right away because then they'd be "loose" and heaven forbid you give it up too easy. In today's world, this song would be a lot shorter if you know what I mean. (This leads into a much larger discussion about how women are taught to resist sexual advances even if they are interested and men are taught to pursue no matter what the woman says because she'll eventually wear down, but I need to get ready for work...)
There is something wrong with both scenarios, true, but maybe the song isn't as bad as it seems on the surface.
I commented on this before reading your answer. I agree!
Its ridiculous.. I loved lady gagas rendition of this song
Humans suck at finding and maintaining balance in most things.
This whole thing is just so fucking stupid.
I absolutely hate revisionist history.
Not even history, it's misrepresentation for current dogma.
I've not seen this version where roles are swapped. It presents a double standard that I don't agree with. No one would take issue with this if, in the lyrics, if the woman was playfully persuading the man to stay.
Also, men often feel pressure to perform and always be in the mood for sex. If they don't, or aren't, they are ridiculed by women who will used all kinds of disparaging language. It has to work both ways or it won't work at all.
@Athena I posted at the beginning a dual version. Obviously not many have bothered to watch right through the two versions at
I thank you for identifying how catty women are regarding men's performance but sadly do not understand that they have as much responsibility for ensuring their partner's pleasure as he does theirs.
Thank you. I did watch it to the end and saw both versions.
I am extremely sensitive to the people who are triggered by all this, but I would also be remiss not to mention the struggle that decent men are having, regarding their fear of making women uncomfortable. We have and do give a lot of mixed messages. It's fair to recognize that, and also to notice how men must be terrified to have their interest, comments or actions misconstrued.
We all know of cases where attacks on men are warranted, and in other cases unfair.
When speaking with people who have been sexually assaulted or are in pain over loved ones who have been, the best thing is to acknowledge their pain and move on. It is a horrible thing to live with.
@Athena thank you for the advise. My own experiences are ignored which does result in some interesting flare up that I try very hard not to let result in ad hominem response. Namaste
Let's rewrite even more of history because it hurts our ittle bitty feelings !!!!
See above.
Knee-jerk banning of material meant to be humorous, light entertainment merely encourages the fanatics to look around for more stuff to create a song-and-dance about (pun intentional)
If followed to its logical conclusion, society ends up with something akin to the puritan regime of Oliver Cromwell's regime, which even banned music in churches.
Society must never yield to PC fanatics. Freedom of speech includes freedom of music choice!
And besides which the full video clip of the song is anything but discriminatory but no doubt the me tooers are blind to the elephant in the room in the second part of the song.
This controversy and discussion was happening way before the #metoo movement.. linking the two seems disingenuous
Have you watched the clip of the song that won the Oscar?
@FrayedBear your point is?
@hippydog Your authoritive statement is not evidenced.
@FrayedBear oh.. lol.. then I forgot to add imo at the end..
But I guess having the conversation itself is not a bad thing.
I support the MeToo movement but not the banning of this song. You have to ask yourself how many people are playing and listening to this song today? Is this song being used actively to get a point across about sexuality? How many times do radio stations play or promote this song?
You see, if we get involved in this in some ridiculous way we are close to the banning and burning of books also. Certainly that will come next if we allow the PC crowd to dominate or make a trend. Our society is screwed up enough already. What sort of censorship is this? We do not need censorship but we do need good common sense.
Me too. I have experienced my share of harassment in my lifetime. But I love this song. Also, I had no idea Joseph Gordon-Leavitt could sing. It makes me like him all the more.
@pasha-one-nine Well at least you know that you are desired by someone hopefully other than a sheep shagger looking to hear human noises rather than baa baa baa?